Goodwill Developer And Consultant v. Kashinath Laxman Vange
Tikam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 597 OF 2024 Goodwill Developer & Consultant & Ors.
...Petitioners
Vs.
Kashinath Laxman Vange & Ors.
...Respondents
_______________________________________________________________ Mr. Anuj Desai a/w. Dhruv B Jain, Advocate for the Petitioners.
_______________________________________________________________ CORAM :
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATED : DECEMBER 14, 2024 P.C.:
1.
Not on Board. Mentioned. Taken on Board.
2.
Heard Mr. Desai, learned Advocate for the Petitioners. 3.
The present Contempt Petition is filed on 9.9.2024. Contempt is alleged of the order dated 5.8. 2016 passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division Panvel. It categorically states that Respondent No.7 is restrained temporarily from creating third party interest in the suit property as well as from carrying out development in the suit property until further orders. The order is appended at page No. 31 at Exhibit 'A' of the Petition.
4.
Learned Advocate for the Petitioners would submit that
the exigency to file the present Petition has arisen because Respondent No.7 has started construction activity on the suit property compelling the Petitioners to file the present Contempt Petition. He would in all fairness submit that when the Contempt Petition was listed before this Court previously, on that date, the Respondents appeared through their Advocate and sought time to file Affidavit-in-Reply. Affidavit-in-Reply is now filed and served on the Petitioners. He would submit that the defence taken by Respondents to purge the contempt is that in view of the amended provisions of Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, pertaining to the Maharashtra Amendment and the subsequent repeal of the said provision, it is contended by the Respondents that in view thereof, the order dated 5.8.
2016 of which contempt is alleged stands automatically vacated. He would submit that it is Respondents' contention that in view of the above, the Respondents can now deal with or develop the suit property.
Procedure, 1908. He would submit that merely by virtue of the Maharashtra Amendment Act the prevailing restrain order or injunction order cannot automatically come to an end unless it is varied by the Court.
5.
In that view of the matter, considering the development and construction undertaken on the suit property and as admitted by the Respondent in its reply, the substantive rights of the Petitioners before the Court are clearly affected. Learned Advocate would therefore urge intervention and indulgence of the Court. In view of the above, an arguable case is made out by the Petitioners for issuance of notice. I need to hear the Respondents on the above issue.
6.
Hence issue notice to the Respondents made returnable on 15.1.2025. Humdast is permitted. Private notice is permitted. 7.
Respondents shall remain present on the next adjourned date so that this Court can hear the parties and proceed with the hearing of petition.
8.
Stand over to 15.01.2025 at 2.30 p.m.
[MILIND N. JADHAV, J.] VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date: 2024.12.14 18:08:58 +0530